Reflections in Police Policy: Adapting from Rigid Enforcement to Community Support
Early in my policing career, over two decades ago, I stood on the street as a young officer with the firm belief that my role was to manage the behavior of others. I believed, without question, that it was my personal duty to regulate human emotion, control public narratives, and maintain a sense of order through direct intervention. At 22, this belief felt absolute—something etched in stone. However, as the years passed, and I gained more exposure to the broader functions of public safety, I began to see things differently. I came to understand that police officers are not behavioral regulators but rather servants of a legal system shaped by the public. This distinction is critical for law enforcement, as it speaks to how governance should respond to evolving social norms, community expectations, and democratic processes.
Law enforcement is often perceived as the visible arm of authority. However, this perception can be misleading. In practice, police officers enforce laws; they do not create them. Those laws are a product of legislative processes that are influenced directly by public norms. Over time, this dynamic relationship between the public and policy-making has led to significant changes in priorities and enforcement strategies. One of the most illustrative examples is the shift in how municipalities address marijuana use.
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, marijuana possession was a key focus of police action. At that time, it was considered a threat to community safety and public order. Officers were trained to detect, confront, and arrest individuals for possession of even small amounts. The public largely supported this stance, influenced by decades of messaging around drug use and the so-called "War on Drugs." But public sentiment began to shift. As research emerged suggesting that marijuana posed fewer health risks than previously thought, and as stories of the negative impacts of harsh sentencing policies became more common, people began to question whether criminalizing marijuana was truly beneficial to society.
Municipal governments, which are closest to the people, began to feel the pressure. Cities like Denver and Seattle moved early to decriminalize possession, citing shifting public opinion and the desire to redirect police resources toward more urgent community needs. These policy changes were not the result of top-down mandates but of grassroots advocacy and ballot initiatives. In fact, studies show that public support for legalization grew steadily, with Pew Research Center reporting in 2019 that 67% of Americans supported marijuana legalization, up from just 31% in 20001.
This shift has had significant implications for municipal management. Budgeting, resource allocation, training programs, and interagency collaboration have all had to evolve. Police departments have had to refocus their efforts, while public health and social services have taken on greater responsibilities in managing substance use and its effects on communities. This realignment reflects a broader recognition that municipal governance is not static; it is responsive to the social contract between the government and its residents.
This evolution also highlights the importance of public participation in shaping municipal policies. Through elections, public forums, and advocacy, residents help determine what behaviors are deemed acceptable or unacceptable. For municipal employees and decision-makers, this evolving consensus should be understood not as a challenge to authority but as a reflection of the democratic process. When policies no longer align with public values, they must be reevaluated. Maintaining the status quo for its own sake can erode public trust in municipal institutions.
This is particularly relevant given the growing calls for transparency and accountability in local government. A 2020 study published in the Journal of Urban Affairs found that municipalities that engaged citizens in meaningful dialogue about policing and public safety were more likely to implement reforms that improved community relations and reduced incidents of excessive force2. These findings suggest that when municipal governments listen and adapt, they are better equipped to serve their communities effectively.
Another key lesson from this shift in marijuana policy is the value of interdepartmental cooperation. As law enforcement steps back from certain roles, other municipal departments must step forward. Public health agencies, housing authorities, and education departments now play a more central role in addressing the root causes of behaviors that were once criminalized. This requires municipal managers to think beyond departmental silos and build integrated systems that prioritize the well-being of residents over punitive outcomes.
There is also a financial dimension to this evolution. Decriminalizing marijuana has allowed cities to redirect law enforcement resources toward more serious crimes and invest in community programs. According to a report from the Urban Institute, cities that reduced enforcement of marijuana laws saw measurable savings in their criminal justice budgets, which were then reinvested in education, housing, and addiction treatment services3. These changes not only reflect a shift in public priorities but also represent a more efficient use of municipal funds.
For those of us working in municipal management, these developments offer a critical reminder: our role is not to dictate the values of our communities, but to facilitate the systems through which those values are expressed. This means creating spaces for dialogue, ensuring transparency in decision-making, and being responsive to the changing needs and priorities of our constituents. It also means recognizing that enforcement is just one tool among many and that prevention, education, and support services are equally vital to building safe and thriving communities.
As someone who once believed that my job was to regulate behavior directly, I now see that my true responsibility lies in supporting the systems that allow the public to shape their own norms. This perspective has guided my approach to public safety and helped me appreciate the complex interplay between law, policy, and public sentiment. It has taught me that effective governance is not about control but about collaboration.
Municipal governments are the front lines of democracy. We serve diverse populations with evolving needs, and our policies must reflect those realities. The example of marijuana enforcement is just one case in a broader shift toward more responsive, people-centered governance. As municipal professionals, we must be prepared to listen, adapt, and lead with humility—understanding that our power comes not from our positions, but from the people we serve.
Pew Research Center. “Two-Thirds of Americans Support Marijuana Legalization.” Pew Research Center, November 14, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/11/14/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/.
Schulenberg, Jennifer L., and Elizabeth R. Groff. “Implementing Community Policing: Lessons from 12 Agencies.” Journal of Urban Affairs 42, no. 3 (2020): 421–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2019.1584537.
Urban Institute. “Changing the Narrative: Police Reform and Budget Reallocation.” Urban Institute, August 2020. https://www.urban.org/research/publication/changing-narrative-police-reform-and-budget-reallocation.